Olivia joined Bermans in October 2024 and is Property Finance Paralegal in our Property team based in Liverpool.
She assists with property finance transactions, including but not limited to, bridging finance deals, re-finances, buy-to-let investment acquisitions and sales.
Olivia studied Business Management The University of Liverpool before completing her LLM degree.
Outside of work, Olivia enjoys cooking, reading, playing the piano.
Giulia joined Bermans in September 2024 and is a Paralegal in our ABL team based in Manchester.
Giulia assists with a wide range of asset finance and invoice transactions for lenders and financial institutions.
She has a background in banking and finance law sector from her time spent at an Italian law firm, complemented by in-house paralegal experience at a London-based software company.
She completed her law studies at the University of Bologna– Alma Mater Studiorum – in Italy and qualified as an Italian lawyer in 2011.
Outside of work, Giulia enjoys travelling to sunny, nature-rich destinations, as well as attending live music events and spending time with her family.
Paul joined Bermans in November 2024 and is a Partner in our Corporate team in Liverpool.
Paul graduated from the University of Leeds in 1991 with a BA (Hons) degree in Economics. He later completed a LLB and PG diploma at the College of Law in 2012.
Paul has worked with healthcare practitioners, dental practices, dental corporate bodies, pharmacies, and nurseries. He also has experience with businesses in construction, professional services, and technology.
Outside of work Paul enjoys travelling, climbing and spending time with his family and dog. He’s also a massive Liverpool FC fan.
A warehouse worker has lost his discrimination claim after complaining about his boss having the name ‘Willy’. In Aylmer v Dnata Catering, the Claimant objected to his boss, William McGinty, referring to himself as ‘Willy’. The Claimant asked his boss to avoid using the name because of its other common use as a slang term for penis. He said in an email to his boss: “If you don’t remove it and keep insisting on being called that – I consider it as sexual harassment.” When his complaints were not followed up, he claimed that he had been victimised on the basis that his initial complaints related to sexual harassment.
Contracts of employment often include a provision which states that employers are able to alter an employee’s powers and responsibilities. A recent High Court decision serves as a reminder that such clauses are not without limit, and must be exercised in such a way that trust and confidence in the employment relationship is not undermined.
Indirect discrimination occurs where an employer has a provision, criterion or practice (known as a ‘PCP’) which places people with a certain protected characteristic, and also places the person complaining, at a particular disadvantage when compared to people without that characteristic. An example might include a restrictive working pattern which women (who are acknowledged to statistically take the higher childcare burden) find more difficult to comply with than men. An employee impacted by this work pattern could allege indirect discrimination.
Most employers use standard contractual documentation which is issued to new recruits without much thought. A recent Court of Appeal decision, relating to a commercial contract, serves as a reminder that a lax approach to contractual wording can have big implications, and not just in a commercial context. It is just as important for contracts of employment and settlement agreements. Employers need to make sure they have covered exactly what they want to cover.